Casement Park in line for major overhaul - 40,000 all seater Stadium.

[armaghniac]

The judge has already made it quite clear that capacity for the area is an issue for him so I dont see how a new planning permission with all the i's dotted and t's crossed will make any difference.

It isn't within the Judges competence to "feel" about capacity, his role is to say that a proper impact assessment had not been drawn up.
In Britain there are crowds each week of this order in top soccer clubs, the Aviva and Croke Park are in residential areas. There is a case, it is just the the case was not competently presented.

The rugby world cup bid should be used to enhance this plan. Any submission to the rugby people will probably require some input from Translink, PSNI etc that people can be moved around successfully and this is type of information that will support a proper case.

[rionach 4]

I don't see anything in the judgement ruling out a 36,000 capacity. The DoE just have to do the impact assessments properly based on that figure against the numbers who have been attending matches in Casement in recent years. When the assessments are complete the GAA will have to address any issues arising. That's the process.
If the residents remain unhappy after another decision to approve has been issued they can go for another JR and so on we go!

At last someone who seems to know what they are talking about.. If the planning concerns are addressed and the go ahead is given the residents of course have the right to a judicial review. But that may or may not be granted . Their case has to go back before the judge and he will decide whether or not their case is strong enough to grant them a JR. If not the stadium goes ahead with planning issues addressed  If he thinks their case is still strong enough then and only then  he will grant them a JR .

[rionach 4]

Hence the word"if"

[Agent Orange]

Who pays the residents legal expenses? I assume these judicial reviews aren't cheap.

[ONeill]

Victory for democracy.

[rionach 4]

Who pays the residents legal expenses? I assume these judicial reviews aren't cheap.

A judicial review can be granted legal aid if it the case being presented is first of all strong enough to warrant a review. Legal aid can be given in varying circumstances . In educational Judicial reviews a child may be put forward and as such legal aid is granted. If the residents choose an individual to represent their case legal aid can be granted if that person's financial  circumstances are deemed insufficient. Unemployed ,income support etc. The judge may in circumstances dictate the responsibility of payment like he did in the previous case. Each case merits its own requirements. I'm sure the residents have this well covered.

[north_antrim_hound]

Who pays the residents legal expenses? I assume these judicial reviews aren't cheap.

A judicial review can be granted legal aid if it the case being presented is first of all strong enough to warrant a review. Legal aid can be given in varying circumstances . In educational Judicial reviews a child may be put forward and as such legal aid is granted. If the residents choose an individual to represent their case legal aid can be granted if that person's financial  circumstances are deemed insufficient. Unemployed ,income support etc. The judge may in circumstances dictate the responsibility of payment like he did in the previous case. Each case merits its own requirements. I'm sure the residents have this well covered.

Very informative
I take it this your forte this stuff

[Kid Twist]

The purpose of a planning JR is not for the judge to assess the planning merits of a decision but more so to judge upon whether the planning authority took into account all materials considerations when arriving at their decision. As such Justice Horner has highlighted the issues which were not proporly considered.

The DOE will now have an opportunity to consider those matters and make a new decision. If they properly consider all those matters and arrive at a decision to approve it unlikely that there will any further grounds for review. The residents best hope is that the DOE decide that the information not originally considered sways their opinion on planning merit and that they either seek a reduction or refuse.
This will be the decision of Mark H.

I know which outcome that I would place my money on.

[JPGJOHNNYG]

The purpose of a planning JR is not for the judge to assess the planning merits of a decision but more so to judge upon whether the planning authority took into account all materials considerations when arriving at their decision. As such Justice Horner has highlighted the issues which were not proporly considered.

The DOE will now have an opportunity to consider those matters and make a new decision. If they properly consider all those matters and arrive at a decision to approve it unlikely that there will any further grounds for review. The residents best hope is that the DOE decide that the information not originally considered sways their opinion on planning merit and that they either seek a reduction or refuse.
This will be the decision of Mark H.

I know which outcome that I would place my money on.

I am no legal expert but you and a few others seem confident this will still happen. If that is the case then surely the residents have been poorly informed. Should they not have been told at an early stage to take the compensation or is this all just some sort of game to try and  squeeze a bit more cash out of the GAA?

[Agent Orange]

Even when they don't take a pay off and put forward their own money for a JR, it's all a big ploy to get some cash.

Are you certain they paid for the JR themselves?

[babarino]

Even when they don't take a pay off and put forward their own money for a JR, it's all a big ploy to get some cash.

Are you certain they paid for the JR themselves?

An article in the back page of The Irish News today says they did. It also said the GAA approached them with an offer to compensate them, as though this was a compromise, and it was declined.

[Agent Orange]

Even when they don't take a pay off and put forward their own money for a JR, it's all a big ploy to get some cash.

Are you certain they paid for the JR themselves?

An article in the back page of The Irish News today says they did. It also said the GAA approached them with an offer to compensate them, as though this was a compromise, and it was declined.

Correct.

Must be true if it's in the Irish News.

[babarino]

Even when they don't take a pay off and put forward their own money for a JR, it's all a big ploy to get some cash.

Are you certain they paid for the JR themselves?

An article in the back page of The Irish News today says they did. It also said the GAA approached them with an offer to compensate them, as though this was a compromise, and it was declined.

Correct.

Must be true if it's in the Irish News.

The article was written by Paddy Heaney. From what I can gather he's full square behind the GAA's plans for Casement.

He'd hardly be spinning a line that counters his own position. The spin came with the insinuation that this was the GAA being reasonable.

[paddyo1]

I,m confused, the GAA have said that they have fully complied with planners all along,yet we have arrived at this ridiculous situation. Don't know who the architects are but they're laughing all the way to the credit union!

[Ulick]

There was an article in the Irish News months ago saying that the residents group were granted a protective order to limit their costs to £10k and I think one individual committed at the time to paying this. Here is the equivalent Tele article.

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/northern-ireland/gaa-casement-park-stadium-row-residents-group-wont-face-crippling-bill-if-it-loses-legal-battle-30361977.html